The DOI matches its Crossref record; 135 of the 135 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 55 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Open accessAbstract
ABSTRACT Prior research has provided valuable insights into how and why employees make a decision about the adoption and use of information technologies (ITs) in the workplace. From an organizational point of view, however, the more important issue is how managers make informed decisions about interventions that can lead to greater acceptance and effective utilization of IT. There is limited research in the IT implementation literature that deals with the role of interventions to aid such managerial decision making. Particularly, there is a need to understand how various interventions can influence the known determinants of IT adoption and use. To address this gap in the literature, we draw from the vast body of research on the technology acceptance model (TAM), particularly the work on the determinants of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, and: (i) develop a comprehensive nomological network (integrated model) of the determinants of individual level (IT) adoption and use; (ii) empirically test the proposed integrated model; and (iii) present a research agenda focused on potential pre‐ and postimplementation interventions that can enhance employees' adoption and use of IT. Our findings and research agenda have important implications for managerial decision making on IT implementation in organizations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
51 Own result · 35 Own interpretation · 21 No full text of the sources · 13 Sources not found · 7 Own method · 5 Not checked yet · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Venkatesh and Speier (1999) investigated the effect of mood during training on user acceptance and found that mood during training played an important role in forming individuals' perceptions of a new IT.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Venkatesh & Speier, 1999 source
The Short-Term Mood Effects section links mood during computer training to perceptions of enjoyment in using the technology. The Discussion reports that negative mood during training reduced intrinsic motivation and intentions to use it, supporting the citing sentence’s broad characterization of the finding. The copy provides no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two-way interaction between subjective norm and voluntariness (SN × EXP) indicated that the effect of subjective norm on behavioral intention was stronger in a mandatory context.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that experience moderated the effect of computer anxiety on perceived ease of use such that the effect became weaker with increasing experience (CANX × EXP).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“experience moderated the effect of perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness such that with increasing experience the effect became stronger.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, TAM3 was able to explain between 52% and 67% of the variance in perceived usefulness across different time periods and models (see Table 5).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that job relevance and output quality had an interactive effect on perceived usefulness such that with increasing output quality, the effect of job relevance on perceived usefulness was stronger.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that experience, in fact, moderated the effect of perceived ease of use (PEOU × EXP) on behavioral intention such that with increasing experience the effect became weaker.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct was higher than the correlations across constructs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Table 4 shows, internal consistency reliabilities (ICRs) were greater than .70 for all constructs at all points of measurement.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Table 3 shows that the item loadings were greater than or at least equal to .70 for all constructs at all time periods.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 25
- The quote only partly states this claim. 4
- Probably not a substantial claim. 26
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Further, incentive alignment, and an important extrinsic reward, may reduce anxiety and increase perceived enjoyment as extrinsic rewards are considered important drivers of intrinsic motivations (Vallerand, 1997;Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999;Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vallerand, 1997 source
- Partly supportedcites Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that verbal rewards (positive feedback) enhanced self-reported interest, which offers limited support for the possibility that an extrinsic reward could increase enjoyment. But the paper does not assess incentive alignment or anxiety, and its Concluding Comments (pp. 658–659) say tangible rewards generally diminish rather than promote intrinsic motivation. The cited source therefore does not support the proposed effect of incentive alignment. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ryan & Deci, 2000 source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that perceived ease of use, subjective norm, image, and result demonstrability were significant predictors of perceived usefulness at all time periods (see Table 5).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While perceived ease of use was significant at T1 and T2, it was not significant at T3, suggesting a moderating effect of experience in the relationship between perceived ease of use and behavioral intention.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the adjustments-that is, perceived enjoyment and objective usability-were not significant at T1, but they were significant at both T2 and T3.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Perceived Usefulness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
- Rests on an assumption: The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“OU × EXP | | | | .20 * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Objective Usability (OU) | .04 | .19 * * | .23 * * * | .03”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CANX × EXP | | | | .21 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjective Norm (SN) | .40 * * * | .32 * * * | .13 * | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SN × VOL | .29 * * * | .22 * * * | .17 * | .03”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Enjoyment (ENJ) | .02 | .22 * * * | .24 * * * | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Result Demonstrability (RES) | .22 * * * | .26 * * * | .28 * * * | .26 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CPLAY × EXP | | | | -.22 * * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) | .22 * * * | .26 * * * | .33 * * * | .08”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ENJ × EXP | | | | .18 * *”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) | .24 * * * | .17 * | .05 | .04”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although longitudinal studies were conducted, the specific moderating role by experience was not tested in Venkatesh (2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh, 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, in the context of enterprise systems, if an individual perceives that his or her use of the system does not benefit the members of his or her work units but rather benefits members from other work units, the user will perceive a lack of incentive alignment that may lead to low user acceptance and use of the system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we conducted Harmon's single factor test and marker variable test (we used job satisfaction as a marker variable) and did not find any significant common method bias.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used validated items from prior research to test TAM3.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our research design allowed us to collect the use data separate from its determinants (e.g., behavioral intention, perceived usefulness, etc.).Particularly, there was at least a 1-month gap between the collection of survey data and the measurement of use.”
- Also stated in: § Measurement · plain
“Such a design approach helped us overcome the problems associated with common method biases.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Measurement · plain
In the paper
“Operationalization of the determinants of perceived ease of use (i.e., computer self-efficacy, perceptions of external control, computer playfulness, computer anxiety, objective usability, and perceived enjoyment) was consistent with Venkatesh (2000).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh (2000)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It posits that individuals' behavioral intention to use an IT is determined by two beliefs: perceived usefulness, defined as the extent to which a person believes that using an IT will enhance his or her job performance and perceived ease of use, defined as the degree to which a person believes that using an IT will be free of effort.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > BACKGROUND
What the sources say
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Ba et al. (2001) argued that while aspects of software engineering (e.g., system characteristics) and technology acceptance (e.g., perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, user satisfaction) are important considerations for system development processes, organizations may fail to gain expected benefits from employees' effective utilization of a system unless employees find that the system fe”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All constructs at each time period exhibited strong psychometric properties and satisfied the criteria of reliability and convergent and discriminant validity.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to Ba et al. (2001), incentive alignment does not necessarily mean organizational rewards for using a system.It is a broad concept that entails an individual's perception that the IT fits with his or her job requirements and value system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Chin, Marcolin, and Newsted (2003) noted that PLS has minimal restrictions in terms of distributional assumptions and sample size.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > We used Partial Least Squares (PLS), a component-based structural equation modeling technique, to analyze our data. PLS-Graph, version 3, build 1126 was used
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chin, Marcolin, and Newsted (2003) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mean-centering helps limit potential multicollinearity, evidenced by the low variation inflation factors (VIFs) for all constructs in our model.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > We used Partial Least Squares (PLS), a component-based structural equation modeling technique, to analyze our data. PLS-Graph, version 3, build 1126 was used
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived usefulness is an instrumental belief that is conceptually similar to extrinsic motivation and is a cognition (as opposed to emotion) regarding the benefits of using a system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Crossover Effects
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It further theorizes that the effect of external variables (e.g., design characteristics) on behavioral intention will be mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > BACKGROUND
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Davis et al., 1989 source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The research sites represented different industries, organizational contexts, and functional areas.Further, the types of ITs were different across the sites.Such variability in organizational settings and types of technologies adds to the potential generalization of our findings.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > METHOD
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“TAM constructs-that is, perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEOU), and behavioral intention (BI)-were operationalized using items adapted from Davis (1989) and Davis et al. (1989).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Incentive alignment has been suggested as the third dimension in systems design (Ba, Stallaert, & Whinston, 2001).The other two dimensions are software engineering and technology acceptance (Ba et al., 2001).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Incentive alignment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ba et al., 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the modification and enhancement activities performed by peers will increase job relevance of a system, improve the output quality of a system, and reduce anxiety related to system use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Peer support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The implementation of interventions is, of course, not a silver bullet for greater IT adoption and effective utilization.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“He also found that the effect of perceived ease of use on behavioral intention to use a system was stronger for individuals who received game-based training.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Venkatesh, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we can develop a rich understanding of the determinants of IT adoption and use and interventions that can favorably influence these determinants, managers can proactively decide on implementing the right interventions to minimize resistance to new ITs and maximize effective utilization of ITs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
- Rests on an assumption: Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.
In the paper
“Training has been suggested as one of the most important postimplementation interventions that leads to greater user acceptance and system success (see Sharma & Yetton, 2007).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sharma & Yetton, 2007 source
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organizational support captures the role of both internal and external experts who can help users deal with the complexity associated with new systems as well as business processes.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implementation of interventions can increase system development costs substantially.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 emphasizes the unique role and processes related to perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use and theorizes that the determinants of perceived usefulness will not influence perceived ease of use and vice versa.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prior research has suggested that employees' perceptions regarding organizational support-that is, facilitating conditions or perceptions of external control (Taylor & Todd, 1995;Venkatesh, 2000;Venkatesh et al., 2003)-will lead to greater user acceptance of new systems.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
What the sources say
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our key argument in this article is that unless organizations can develop effective interventions to enhance IT adoption and use, there is no practical utility of our rich understanding of IT adoption.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: There is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suggest that interventions discussed in this article can help organizations generate favorable individuals' reactions toward business process changes and process standards implementation.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“For example, while self-efficacy may have weak influence on perceived usefulness as shown in Agarwal and Karahanna (2000), we argue that this influence will become nonsignificant in the presence of other important social and cognitive constructs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Agarwal and Karahanna (2000) source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 posits that perceptions of external control are important and stable determinants of perceived ease of use.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organizational support is a key source of perceptions of external control.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, experts can help employees modify certain aspects of a new system, thus increasing job relevance, output quality, and results demonstrability of a system.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Organizational support
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to the complexity of ITs, it is increasingly difficult for employees to make effective decisions about adoption, utilization, and coping with new ITs.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Implications for Decision Making
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Some employees may react favorably to these changes, while the others may perceive these changes as a threat to their well-being (Orlikowski, 2000;Boudreau & Robey, 2005).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Postimplementation Interventions
What the sources say
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TAM3 posits that with increasing experience, while the effect of perceived ease of use on behavioral intention will diminish, the effect of perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness will increase.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Theoretical Contributions
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suggest that the role of training will be even more important in the context of complex systems (e.g., enterprise systems) that are more central to employees' work life.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: Much prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As these systems are more likely to invoke negative reactions from employees because of their disruptive nature, effective training interventions can mitigate these negative reactions and help employees form favorable perceptions toward these systems.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Training
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Participants who completed all measurement points are representative of the initial user populations at the four sites.
“Out of 50 potential users of the system who participated in the training, 39 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
“Out of 51 potential users of the new system who attended the training, 43 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
“Out of 51 potential users of the new system, 36 provided usable responses at all points of measurement.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The four sites' data can be pooled for the PLS analysis despite differences in industry, organizational context, and technology.
“Data were collected from four different organizations-sites A through D-implementing new ITs.”
“The research sites represented different industries, organizational contexts, and functional areas.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Management support in individual-level IT adoption literature has been conceptualized and operationalized as organizational mandate and compliance.
“While management support has been conceptualized and operationalized as organizational mandate and compliance, particularly in the individual-level IT adoption literature, we suggest that there is a need to develop a richer conceptualization of management support to enhance our understanding of its role in IT adoption contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is limited research on the role of incentive alignment in IT adoption contexts.
“There is limited research on the role of incentive alignment in IT adoption contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Much prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.
“However, much of the prior research on training in the context of IT adoption has been conducted for simple ITs, such as word processing and e-mail.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is little or no research on the role of peer support in the context of IT adoption.
“While peer support is potentially an important intervention that can lead to greater user acceptance, there is little or no research on the role of peer support in the context of IT adoption.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.
“However, there is little or no scientific research aimed at identifying and linking interventions with specific determinants of IT adoption.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There have been numerous cases of enterprise system failures because of user resistance.
“There have been numerous cases of enterprise system failures because of user resistance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In many cases, users stopped using an enterprise system because they saw no benefits of using the new system.
“In many cases, the users stopped using an enterprise system, as they saw no benefits of using the new system.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Other types of reactions, such as avoidance, sabotage, workarounds, and shortcuts, are prevalent.
“Other types of reactions, such as avoidance, sabotage, workarounds, and shortcuts are also prevalent.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.
“ITs are becoming increasingly complex and implementation costs are very high.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.
“Implementation failures of many of today's ITs cost millions of dollars for organizations.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“the extensive focus of TAM on technology to the neglect of social and psychological parameters (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998;Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) limits its explanatory and predictive utilities, and therefore demands its integration with other frameworks”
From Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution (2016) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A technology that provides information quickly and easily will lead to improvements in job performance, which in turn will encourage greater use of a given technology (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The adoption of new technologies is shaped by user perceptions and usage patterns (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) as well as student characteristics and experiences (Abdaljaleel et al., 2023; Tiwari et al., 2024).”
From “ChatGPT seems too good to be true”: College students’ use and perceptions of generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is proposed that perceived enjoyment is positively related to perceived ease of use [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The scales applied have been verified in preceding studies [12, 28].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, it is proposed that perception of external control is an element that conditions perceived ease of use [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It is proposed that result demonstrability is an antecedent of perceived usefulness [12].”
From Gender and Acceptance of E-Learning: A Multi-Group Analysis Based on a Structural Equation Model among College Students in Chile and Spain (2015) · cites this paper as [12]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“which explains that users’ decisions to accept and use a technology are influenced by perceived usefulness, ease of use, and social influence of others.”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Some of the themes identified in this review overlap with previous models conceptualizing engagement with digital health interventions, as well as general technology acceptance and health behavior, such as the Efficiency Model of Support [251], Technology Acceptance Model [253], and Health Belief Model [249].”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Our findings are in line with the Technology Acceptance Model”
From Barriers to and facilitators of user engagement with digital mental health interventions: Systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [253]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Information-related characteristics of a system can impact its PU as they can improve productivity and performance (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Firstly, considering usability , a reliable, flexible and user-friendly system is more likely to create a positive user experience (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A typical criticism of the TAM is in relation to its lack of practical managerial guidance (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Venkatesh and Bala (2008) present four generic antecedents to the TAM: i ndividual differences , system characteristics , social influence , and facilitating conditions .”
From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Venkatesh and Bala (2008)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The model explains approximately 40% of the variance in individuals’ intention to use a new technology and actual use [39].”
From An Assessment of How Clinicians and Staff Members Use a Diabetes Artificial Intelligence Prediction Tool: Mixed Methods Study (2023) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It theorizes that individuals’ intention to use new technology is determined by perceived usefulness, defined as “the extent to which a person believes that using [a new technology] will enhance his or her job performance,” and perceived ease of use, defined as “the degree to which a person believes that using [a new technology] will be free of effort” [39].”
From An Assessment of How Clinicians and Staff Members Use a Diabetes Artificial Intelligence Prediction Tool: Mixed Methods Study (2023) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“TAM's assertion that perceived usefulness is a primary determinant of technology acceptance and subsequent usage behaviors (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
From The impact of AI-assisted pair programming on student motivation, programming anxiety, collaborative learning, and programming performance: a comparative study with traditional pair programming and individual approaches (2025) · cites this paper as Venkatesh & Bala, 2008
In the citing paper
“Currently, many studies contributing to the adoption research of mHealth for youths are based on the technology acceptance model, an information systems theory that models user’s acceptance of technology mainly based on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use [48-50].”
From Understanding Mobile Health and Youth Mental Health: Scoping Review (2023) · cites this paper as [50]
In the citing paper
“Currently, many studies contributing to the adoption research of mHealth for youths are based on the technology acceptance model, an information systems theory that models user’s acceptance of technology mainly based on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use [48-50].”
From Understanding Mobile Health and Youth Mental Health: Scoping Review (2023) · cites this paper as [50]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Measurement
“Specifically the measurements of use and its determinants were separated by 1 month (T1-T2), 3 months (T2-T3) and 2 months (T3-T4).”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Procedure
“after initial training (T1), 1 month after implementation (T2), and 3 months after implementation (T3).We also measured self-reported usage at T2, T3, and 5 months after implementation (T4).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Additional information
“a All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale (where 1: strongly disagree; 2: moderately disagree, 3: somewhat disagree, 4: neutral (neither disagree nor agree), 5: somewhat agree, 6: moderately agree, and 7: strongly agree), except computer self-efficacy, which was measured using a 10-point Guttman scale.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Additional information
“Use (USE) USE1 On average, how much time do you spend on the system each day?”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > Explaining and Predicting Behavioral Intention and Use
“The two-way interaction between subjective norm and voluntariness (SN × EXP) indicated that the effect of subjective norm on behavioral intention was stronger in a mandatory context.”
§ Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions > CONCLUSIONS
“| SN × VOL | .29 * * * | .22 * * * | .17 * | .03 |”
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
Self-citation(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-3352 · Cited by 36,647
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions
Aiken, L., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/10520-147 · Cited by 24,912
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
Self-citationIntrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666
Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800313 · Cited by 13,287
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Beach L. R., 1996, Decision making in the workplace: A unified perspective, 1
- Cohen D. S., 2005, Why change is an affair of the heart, CIO Magazine
- Gross G., 2005, Standards a must for adoption for health‐care IT, CIO Magazine
- Koch C., 2004, Nike rebounds: How (and why) Nike recovered from its supply chain disaster, CIO Magazine
- Mennecke B. E., 1998, Discovering and overcoming the hidden profile bias in group decision making: The influence of group history and use of a group support system, Journal of MIS, 15, 173
- Overby S., 2002, How to win friends and influence users, CIO Magazine
- Saga V. L., 1994, Diffusion, transfer and implementation of information technology, 67
- Vallacher R. R., 1996, The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior, 260
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 4,101–4,200 of 8,090
The Effectiveness of e-Recruitment Adoption: A TAM Approach Examining User Perspectives
Sathyanarayana, S., Mohanasundaram, T., Shanthi, D., & Rajendra, P. (2024) · SDMIMD Journal of Management · doi:10.18311/sdmimd/2024/41928 · Cited by 5
Consumer Adoption of BRImo Mobile Banking Application: An Extended TAM Perspective
Amriena, G., & Ramayanti, R. (2024) · Contributions to management science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-48770-5_61 · Cited by 5
AbdulHussein, A., Dimitrov, S., & Cozzarin, B. P. (2024) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2024.2336712 · Cited by 5
“Perceived ease of use (PEOU) : in taM3, more light is shed on the PeOU construct (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). studies present taM3 with the following extended measures of PeOU to the original taM model: computer self-efficacy, perception of control, computer anxiety, and…”
Kikkenborg, J., Magelund, E., Riise, M. S., et al. (2024) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/52575 · Cited by 5
“Perceiving technological challenges may affect individuals’ perception of ease of use, which is an important determinant for the intention to use technology [42].”
BackgroundKim, H. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2357910 · Cited by 9
“Certain system characteristics can lead individuals to form favorable or unfavorable perceptions regarding the system’s usefulness and ease of use (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), and can trigger negative emotions such as anxiety or fear (Kim, 2019, 2021) and positive emotions such as enjoyment (Kim et…”
InfluentialThe Impact of Digital Textbooks on Student Engagement in Higher Education
Jayaraman, J., & Aane, J. (2024) · Advances in higher education and professional development book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-3559-8.ch011 · Cited by 5
Exploring Human Artificial Intelligence Using the Knowledge Behavior Gap Model
Stibe, A., & Dinh, T. H. N. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-68005-2_14 · Cited by 5
Workers’ Attitudes Towards Digital Transformation and Perceived Well-Being At Work: A Case Study
Lindner, F., Przybysz, K. A., Schneider, G., & Keil, S. (2024) · ACC Journal · doi:10.2478/acc-2024-0006 · Cited by 5
How Do Short-Form Video Creators Select Media Platforms? Research Based on the Extended UTAUT Model
Liang, J., Wang, J., & Yao, K. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2422762 · Cited by 8
“The TAM series had models of TAM 0 (Davis, 1989), TAM 1 (Venkatesh & Davis, 1996), TAM 2 (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) and TAM 3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Machine translation post-editing through emotional narratives
Ramos, M. D. M. S. (2025) · Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts · doi:10.1075/ttmc.00152.san · Cited by 6
Feasibility and Usage of a Virtual Assistant Device in Cognitively Impaired Homebound Older Adults
Nunez, M., Patel, P., Ulin, L., Kian, L. A., Cominsky, M., Burnett, J., & Lee, J. L. (2025) · Journal of Applied Gerontology · doi:10.1177/07334648251314284 · Cited by 5
Ballenas, E. B., & Lasco, M. T. (2024) · International Conference on TVET Excellence & Development (ICTeD) · doi:10.1109/icted62334.2024.10844599 · Cited by 5
“Performance Expectancy (PE) pertains to the anticipated benefits or performance improvements individuals expect when using technology, such as increased convenience and simplicity [11].”
Abdallah-Ou-Moussa, S., Wynn, M. G., Kharbouch, O., Aoufi, S. E., & Rouaine, Z. (2025) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc9020031 · Cited by 10
Influence of Attitude toward Artificial Intelligence (AI) on Job Performance with AI in Nurses
Morales-García, W. C., Sairitupa-Sanchez, L. Z., Flores-Paredes, A., Morales-García, M., & Gutierrez-Caballero, F. N. (2025) · Data and Metadata · doi:10.56294/dm2025221 · Cited by 6
Çağlayan, M., Çağlayan, E., & Acartürk, C. (2025) · Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s11162-025-09838-6 · Cited by 5
“This enhancement aligns with the literature suggesting that integrating multiple models can offer a more comprehensive understanding of technol‑ ogy acceptance (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Global perceptions and acceptance of irradiated food: a comparative systematic review
Maataoui, J., Abduljaber, M. F., & Khaddor, M. (2025) · Italian Journal of Food Safety · doi:10.4081/ijfs.2025.12885 · Cited by 5
“While few researchers have explicitly tested the technology acceptance model in its original form (Davis et al ., 1993) or newer versions (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008), the theory appears to be relevant, especially when one considers uncertainty about irradiated food safety.”
Ngan, L. T. T., Phu, N. T., Anh, N. H., Thu, N. N. A., Thuan, N. T. M., & Uyen, H. T. T. (2025) · The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2025.2477591 · Cited by 5
“If their friends or families think that the adoption of new technology will bring positive outcomes, they tend to share the same belief (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
Mertens, A., Brandl, C., Blotenberg, I., et al. (2013) · Advanced technologies and societal change · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37988-8_17 · Cited by 5
Beil, J., Cihlar, V., & Kruse, A. (2013) · Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie · doi:10.1007/s00391-013-0546-0 · Cited by 5
Using serious games for idea assessment in service innovation
Feldmann, N., Adam, M. T. P., & Bauer, M. (2014) · doi:10.13140/2.1.2873.0881 · Cited by 5
Lewellen, M., Hooper, V. A., & Oliver, G. (2014) · Tuwhera (Auckland University of Technology) · Cited by 5
Baleghi-Zadeh, S., Ayub, A. F. M., Mahmud, R. B., et al. (2014) · International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies · doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.2n.1p.29 · Cited by 5
Al-Ghazali, B. M., Rasli, A., & Yusoff, R. M. (2015) · Jurnal Teknologi · doi:10.11113/jt.v72.3934 · Cited by 4
“empirically test the proposed integrated model; and presented research agenda focused on potential pre- and postimplementation interventions that enhance adoption and use of IT” [51].”
BackgroundMethodMulti-screen services adoption and use-diffusion: The BEST model perspective
Lai, H., Yu, Y., Tuan, Y. M., et al. (2014) · doi:10.1109/ieem.2014.7058745 · Cited by 5
A diversity-sensitive evaluation method
Mourouzis, A., Antona, M., & Stephanidis, C. (2010) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-010-0211-y · Cited by 5
“, see [29]), with TAM3 [57] being one of the most recent extensions; however, most of them are beyond the scope of this work.”
BackgroundUnderstanding Mobile Internet Diffusion: The Case of Jamaica
Mills, A., Tennant, V., & Chevers, D. A. (2011) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 5
ADOPTION PROCESS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) INNOVATIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS
Hameed, M. A. (2012) · Cited by 5
Theorising about the Life Cycle of IT Use: An appropriation perspective
Fidock, J. J. T., & Carroll, J. M. (2012) · ANU Press eBooks · doi:10.22459/isf.10.2012.04 · Cited by 5
Predicting the acceptance of unit guide information systems
Atif, A., Richards, D., & BILGIN, A. A. B. (2012) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 5
Intelligent decision support in Intensive Care : towards technology acceptance
Portela, F., Santos, M. F., Machado, J. M., et al. (2012) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · Cited by 5
The U-Constructs and Mobile Usage Behavior: Development and Validation of the U-Feat Scale
Jain, V., & Roy, S. (2015) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2015.1133396 · Cited by 5
“We derived the nomological network of the U-Feat primarily from Hoffman and Novak’s (1996) network navigation model and the popular technology adoption model (TAM; Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).”
MethodHow Generation Y Perceives Social Networking Applications in Corporate Environments
Boughzala, I. (2014) · Advances in e-business research series · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6182-0.ch009 · Cited by 5
A Multimethod Study of Enterprise Social Media Implementation and Use
Bala, H., Massey, A. P., & Hsieh, C. J. (2016) · Journal of Organizational and End User Computing · doi:10.4018/joeuc.2016070109 · Cited by 5
Self-citationTheoretical Foundations for Information Systems Success in Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises
Devos, J., Landeghem, H. V., & Deschoolmeester, D. (2012) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0170-3.ch005 · Cited by 5
Assessment of Exergames as Treatment and Prevention of Dysgraphia
Borghese, N. A., Palmiotto, C., Essenziale, J., et al. (2016) · Biosystems & biorobotics · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46669-9_72 · Cited by 5
Innovation Performance and its Influence on Enterprise Economic Efficiency in the Market
Prokhorova, M. P., Prodanova, N., Reznichenko, S. M., Vasiliev, V. P., & Kireev, V. S. (2016) · International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues · Cited by 5
Rivière, A., Mencarelli, R., Belvaux, B., et al. (2017) · Systèmes d information & management · doi:10.3917/sim.164.0043 · Cited by 5
Livet, M., & Fixsen, A. A. M. (2018) · Health Promotion Practice · doi:10.1177/1524839917749468 · Cited by 5
Using an Artificial Agent as a Behavior Model to Promote Assistive Technology Acceptance
Fountoukidou, S., Ham, J., Matzat, U., et al. (2018) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78978-1_24 · Cited by 5
“Computer self-efficacy has been found to be a major determinant of perceived ease of use (with specific computer self-efficacy to be a more proximal predictor [13]), especially in the absence of any direct experience with a system [12].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialMobile Application Diffusion and Success
Hajiheydari, N., Hernandez-Carrion, J. R., & Ashkani, M. (2018) · International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications · doi:10.4018/ijesma.2018100102 · Cited by 5
Adoption of Cloud Computing Services by Developing Country Students: An Empirical Study
Almazroi, A. A., & Shen, H. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99007-1_85 · Cited by 5
Marques, A. B., Barbosa, S. D. J., & Conte, T. U. (2018) · Journal on Interactive Systems · doi:10.5753/jis.2018.709 · Cited by 5
“As our questionnaires were adaptations of the original statements of the TAM model [18], it is important to evaluate the reliability of our data collection instrument.”
MethodRabayah, K. S. (2019) · IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon.2019.8725110 · Cited by 6
“TAM is known for its explanatory power, and it has been used by hundreds of studies that investigated the technology acceptance and adoption, including e-learning systems, [5,6].”
BackgroundScientific Developers v/s Static Analysis Tools: Vision and Position Paper
Krishnamurthy, R., Heinze, T. S., Haupt, C., Schreiber, A., & Meinel, M. (2019) · International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE) · doi:10.1109/chase.2019.00029 · Cited by 5
“There exist different models for explaining user adoption and use of IT in the research literature, where Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [4] is among the most prominent ones [5].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPurwanto, S., Hartini, S., & Premananto, G. C. (2019) · International Conference on Innovation in Research (ICIIR) · doi:10.2991/iciir-18.2019.11 · Cited by 5
Book Piracy Behavior among College Students in Indonesia
Fitriasih, R., Hati, S. R. H., & Achyar, A. (2019) · Journal of e-Learning & Higher Education · doi:10.5171/2019.253359 · Cited by 5
“The literature on TPB has explained that if one already has an intention then that intention will lead to actual behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundGame or Live Streaming?: Motivation and Social Experience in Live Mobile Quiz Shows
Kim, S., Lee, G., Lee, S.-Y., Lee, S., & Lee, J. (2019) · Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play · doi:10.1145/3311350.3347187 · Cited by 4
“Ease of enjoyment can be interpreted as a combination of two factors from the technology acceptance model: ease of use and perceived enjoyment [26].”
BackgroundHermes, S., Lurz, M., Böhm, M., & Krcmar, H. (2019) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.067 · Cited by 6
Veeneman, W. W., van Kuijk, J., & Mastrigt, S. H. (2020) · Lecture notes in mobility · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38028-1_16 · Cited by 5
Dohan, M. S., & Tan, J. (2014) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03421 · Cited by 5
“This “payoff” will also contribute to the degree that the patient believes the use of this tool is useful for its intended purpose [Davis, 1989; Venkatesh and Bala, 2008].”
BackgroundHenning, F., & Ruth, N. (2020) · Jahrbuch der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Musikpsychologie/Jahrbuch Musikpsychologie · doi:10.5964/jbdgm.2019v29.48 · Cited by 5
“Denn Modelle wie die Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis, 2003) oder das TAM3 (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) sind aufgrund der großen Anzahl an unabhängigen Variablen schwer handhabbar und können allgemeine Zusammenhänge nur bedingt erklären (Bagozzi,…”
BackgroundFactors Influencing the Use of Smartphones for Programing: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach
Alwabel, A. S. A., Al‐Gahtani, S. S., & Talab, A. (2020) · International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management · doi:10.1142/s0219877020500327 · Cited by 6
Towards an improved acceptability assessment model of innovative solutions in the design phase
Salgado, L. A., Bonjour, É., & Rakotondranaivo, A. (2020) · International Journal of Business Information Systems · doi:10.1504/ijbis.2020.10029802 · Cited by 5
Readiness of small and medium enterprises for marketing automation
Semerádová, T., & Weinlich, P. (2020) · ACC Journal · doi:10.15240/tul/004/2020-2-005 · Cited by 10
Roboter zur Unterstützung im Alter
Ruf, E., Lehmann, S., Pauli, C., & Misoch, S. (2020) · HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik · doi:10.1365/s40702-020-00681-0 · Cited by 9
Exploring Empathetic and Cognitive Interfaces for Autonomous Vehicles
Chateau, B., Unrein, H., & André, J. (2020) · International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications (CHIRA) · doi:10.5220/0010130701390144 · Cited by 5
Barber, C. S., Stavroulaki, K., & Santanello, C. (2020) · INNOVATIONS in Pharmacy · doi:10.24926/iip.v11i4.3328 · Cited by 5
Matias, J. B., & Timosan, J. Q. (2020) · International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems · doi:10.4018/ijeis.2021010104 · Cited by 5
Gerdenitsch, C., Deinhard, L., Kern, B., et al. (2021) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72632-4_20 · Cited by 5
Zhang, X., Wang, Y., & Li, Z. (2021) · International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education · doi:10.1177/00207209211005271 · Cited by 10
“20 TAM is widely used to understand people’s attitudes and to study the adoption factors of information systems and technology.”
BackgroundRetractedHassan, M. W., Kazmi, S., Rehman, M. A., Amaad, H., & Padlee, S. F. (2021) · Studies of Applied Economics · doi:10.25115/eea.v39i4.4493 · Cited by 5
Analysing antecedence of an intelligent voice assistant use intention and behaviour
Tanribilir, R. N. (2021) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.52637.1 · Cited by 5
Danso, A., Rousi, R. A., & Thompson, M. R. (2021) · Human Technology · doi:10.17011/ht/urn.202106223979 · Cited by 5
Ntale, P. D., & Ngoma, M. (2021) · Digital Policy Regulation and Governance · doi:10.1108/dprg-01-2021-0025 · Cited by 8
Benedict, C., Lazard, A. J., Smith, S., Agrawal, A., Collins, M. K. R., & Love, B. (2021) · Journal of applied communications research · doi:10.1080/00909882.2021.1971737 · Cited by 6
“Usability perceptions and behavioral intentions were assessed with adapted items from TAM research (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), including: two items for perceived ease of use, ‘My interaction with the [feature] is clear and understandable’ and ‘I find the [feature] easy to use,’ one-to-one messaging α…”
BackgroundMethodBöhm, V., Wolff, C. G., Geiselhart, C., et al. (2021) · doi:10.1145/3473856.3474017 · Cited by 5
“The idea to increase technology adoption by implementing appropriate interventions is already presented in 2008 by Venkatesh and Bala [15].”
BackgroundMethodNakamura, W. T., Filho, J. C. D. S., Teixeira, L. M., et al. (2021) · doi:10.1145/3493244.3493245 · Cited by 5
“…tool; iv) a spreadsheet to report the elicited requirements; v) a post-study questionnaire comprising the Technology Acceptance Model 3 (TAM3) [38] with additional open-ended questions to obtain participants’ opinion on what was easy or difficult when using the tool and improvement…”
MethodThe Impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic on Education
Dang, M. Y., & Zhang, Y. G. (2021) · International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education · doi:10.4018/ijicte.292481 · Cited by 5
“Facilitating conditions is defined as an individual’s belief on the existence of organizational and technical support of using an information system (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh et al., 2003).”
BackgroundPrihatono, F. A., & Adi, T. J. W. (2021) · IPTEK Journal of Proceedings Series · doi:10.12962/j23546026.y2020i1.10854 · Cited by 5
In-store surveillance technologies: what drives their acceptability among consumers?
Brooksbank, R. W., Scott, J. M., & Fullerton, S. D. (2022) · The International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research · doi:10.1080/09593969.2022.2042713 · Cited by 5
“Having initially been critiqued by its originators and others (e.g., Davis and Venkatesh 1996), it was extended as the ‘TAM 2’ (Venkatesh and Davis 2000) before being further developed into ‘TAM 3’ (Venkatesh and Bala 2008).”
Offsite Sustainability—Disentangling the Rhetoric through Informed Mindset Change
Ezcan, V., & Goulding, J. S. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14084606 · Cited by 7
Byamukama, W., Kalibwani, R., & Mbabazi, B. P. (2022) · International Journal of Scientific and Management Research · doi:10.37502/ijsmr.2022.5404 · Cited by 5
“…(TAM) (Davis, Bogozzi and Warshaw, 1989, Technology Acceptance Model two (TAM2) Venkatesh and Davis (2000), Technology Acceptance Model three (TAM3) Venkatesh and Bala (2008), Unified Theory of Acceptance Model (UTAUT) Venkatesh et al; 2012 and the Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance Model…”
BackgroundInfluentialExploring Students’ Intentions towards Game-Based Learning in Statistics
Jamil, N. I., Rosle, A. N., Baharuddin, F. N., et al. (2019) · International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences · doi:10.6007/ijarbss/v9-i13/6866 · Cited by 5
Are Wearables Good or Bad for Society?
Hein, D. W. E., Jodoin, J. L., Rauschnabel, P. A., et al. (2018) · Wearable Technologies · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5484-4.ch060 · Cited by 5
New Perspectives on Payment Systems
de Luna, I. R., Montoro-Ríos, F. J., & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J. (2017) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-2599-8.ch070 · Cited by 5
Bang, P. V., Pham, K. T., & Tung, D. T. (2022) · Journal of Sustainability Science and Management · doi:10.46754/jssm.2022.03.006 · Cited by 5
Perceptions Towards MySejahtera, e-Penjana: Identifying Key Factors
Lee, C., Chua, S.-J., & Kok, M.-H. (2021) · International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Education (WAIE) · doi:10.1109/waie54146.2021.00023 · Cited by 5
Towards a socio-specific artificial intelligence adoption framework
Smit, D., & Eybers, S. (2022) · EPiC series in computing · doi:10.29007/pc8j · Cited by 5
A Contextualized Acceptance Model for Proactive Smart Services
Graf‐Drasch, V., Röglinger, M., Wenninger, A., & Hosseini, S. (2022) · Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1007/s41471-022-00139-7 · Cited by 7
“…that focus on technical drivers are the Technology Acceptance Model in various versions (TAM, for example, Davis 1989; Venkatesh and Davis 2000; Venkatesh and Bala 2008) with antecedents such as Perceived Usefulness or Perceived Ease of Use , the Model of PC Utilization (MPCU, Thompson et al.…”
BackgroundACCEPTANCE OF SUSTAINED UTILIZATION BEHAVIOR OF TELEMEDICINE IN THE POST-COVID-19 ERA
CHEN, T.-H., MA, C.-C., CHIANG, L.-L., & OU, T.-C. (2022) · Applied Ecology and Environmental Research · doi:10.15666/aeer/2006_46334644 · Cited by 5
“Represents the fact that this has been extended by social acceptance as an actual predictor of behavioral intentions for the use of telemedicine, and that intention constructs are direct and robust predictors of technology acceptance and use (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundOgundipe, A., Sim, T. F., & Emmerton, L. (2023) · Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.rcsop.2023.100252 · Cited by 5
Zhang, R., Li, S., Hong, M., Zhou, Y., Lin, Y., Gao, Y., Hu, W., Ni, X., Wu, W., & Lou, Y. (2023) · Nursing Open · doi:10.1002/nop2.1700 · Cited by 5
Awang, Y., Taib, A., Shuhidan, S. M., et al. (2023) · Indonesian Journal of Sustainability Accounting and Management · doi:10.28992/ijsam.v7s1.879 · Cited by 5
Haruna, B., & Kaur, K. (2023) · Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science · doi:10.22452/mjlis.vol28no1.2 · Cited by 5
Understanding Customer Relationship Management
Salah, O. H., Yusof, Z. M., Mohamed, H. B., & Elias, N. F. (2023) · SpringerBriefs in business · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-8321-6_1 · Cited by 5
Investigating the Influence of Technology Anxiety on Healthcare Metaverse Adoption
Damar, S., & Köksalmış, G. H. (2023) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-48397-4_5 · Cited by 5
Sánchez, J. D. A., Eraso, Á. G. B., & Erro‐Garcés, A. (2023) · International Journal of Manpower · doi:10.1108/ijm-10-2022-0505 · Cited by 5
Understanding social network site consumer engagements
Hamilton, J. R., & Tee, S. (2013) · ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) · Cited by 5
SATISFAÇÃO E CONTINUIDADE DE USO EM UM AMBIENTE VIRTUAL DE APRENDIZAGEM
Pereira, F. A. D. M., Ramos, A. S. M., & das Chagas, M. M. (2015) · Revista de Gestão · doi:10.5700/rege555 · Cited by 5
Mangin, J.-P. L., Guerrero, M. M., Bourgault, N., et al. (2013) · Journal of Business Theory and Practice · doi:10.22158/jbtp.v1n2p342 · Cited by 5
“All researches offer evidence of significant effects of ‘Ease of Use’ perception on ‘Intention to Use’ directly or indirectly through ‘Perceived Usefulness’ and ‘Attitude towards Using’ (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008; Wixom and Todd, 2005; Moon and Kim, 2001; Venkatesh and Morris, 2000).”
BackgroundInfluentialICT service providers strategies and customer migration
Lee, S.-G., Trimi, S., & Yang, C.-G. (2014) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-03-2014-0074 · Cited by 5
“The previous research on customer migration patterns has focussed mainly on the acceptance of ICT in general (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008; Wells et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2013).”
BackgroundJuric, J., Lindenmeier, J., Fritsch, T., & Kerßenfischer, F. (2015) · Zeitschrift für die gesamte Versicherungswissenschaft · doi:10.1007/s12297-015-0294-x · Cited by 5
Brophy, C., Blackler, A. L., & Popović, V. (2015) · QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) · Cited by 7
HRIS Design Characteristics: Towards a General Research Frame- work
Mueller, D., Strohmeier, S., & Gasper, C. (2010) · Cited by 6
Impact of ICT Usage in Primary-School Students' Learning in The Case of Thailand
Arukaroon, B., & Krairit, D. (2017) · International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies · doi:10.4018/ijwltt.2017040102 · Cited by 5
Organizational Dynamics of Sustainable eHealth Implementation: A Case Study of eHMIS
Fanta, G. B., Pretorius, L., & Erasmus, L. D. (2017) · Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) · doi:10.23919/picmet.2017.8125472 · Cited by 5
“Technology adoption is linked to processes and decisions executed in preimplementation phase; whereas the processes and decisions of technology acceptance are related to an implementation and post-implementation phases [13], [14].”
BackgroundExploring Factors Affecting Consumers’ Adoption of Shopping via Mobile Applications in Turkey
Yıldız, O., & Kitapçı, H. (2018) · International Journal of Marketing Studies · doi:10.5539/ijms.v10n2p60 · Cited by 5
“Facilitating conditions refer to organizational support which makes use of information technologies possible (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008).”
BackgroundPredicting Consumer Intention to Adopt Near Field Communication Enabled Mobile Payment in Thailand
Ruangkanjanases, A., & Sirikulprasert, N. (2018) · Journal of Telecommunication Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC) · Cited by 5
The Role of Technology in Developing Markets: The Experiences and Challenges of Ghana
Antwi, M. O., & Lulin, Z. (2018) · Canadian Journal of Applied Science and Technology - Canadian Journal of Applied Science and Technology · Cited by 5
What Motivates Young Technology-Literate Consumers in Densely Populated Areas?
Vajjhala, N. R., & Strang, K. D. (2019) · Advances in marketing, customer relationship management, and e-services book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9697-4.ch002 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Venkatesh, Viswanath
- Bala, Hillol
- Venue
- Decision Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 273-315
- ISSN
- 0011-7315 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5915
- OpenAlex
- W2112042732
- Cited by
- 8,159
- References
- 135
- Citations by year
- 2026: 909 · 2025: 912 · 2024: 780 · 2023: 746 · 2022: 717 · 2021: 645 · 2020: 556 · 2019: 499 · 2018: 396 · 2017: 379 · 2016: 320 · 2015: 324 · 2014: 287 · 2013: 266 · 2012: 186
- FWCI
- 175.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Decision Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › ERP Systems Implementation and Impact
- Keywords
- technology acceptance model, information technology adoption, information technology use, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, management interventions, IT implementation, organizational decision-making, nomological network
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-30, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-30 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
